Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Regarding mining in Fiji

from wI was interested to read one article in the Fiji Sun which is not biased towards a spin view pro mining, so it's worth publishing here. Though it's not about babasiga land, it is relevant to any place in Fiji where a mining company comes into Fiji to make money in this way.

While tension continues to build up over the proposed multi-billion dollar Namosi copper and gold mine, the terms of reference for the environmental impact assessment has been finalised.

This has been confirmed to the Fiji Sun by the director of the Department of Environment Jope Davetanivalu.

Mr Davetanivalu, while not revealing the contents of the terms of reference, said the final version has been handed over to the relevant authorities.

The Tikina Namosi Landowners Committee, however, yesterday expressed their concerns about the contents of the terms of reference. Committee spokesman Sipiriano Nariva said they had not expected to receive the final draft until some form of feedback had been sought from the landowners. “We made just one submission and the next thing we were informed was that this is the final terms of reference. We are major stakeholders in this who will be affected should mining go ahead. We need to have our voice taken into consideration,” he said.

Exploration works by the Australian mining company, Newcrest Mining which leads the Namosi Joint Venture in partnership with Japanese interests, have been stopped by the landowners.

Mr Nariva said the reason for their concern was, since their submission for the terms of reference last year, the landowners had gained a better understanding of mining.He said this was why it was important for the landowners to give more feedback in terms of what more was needed to be included in the terms of reference. Pointing out some of the things believed to be vague in the terms of reference, Mr Nariva said one such line was where it said: ‘Prediction of environmental, social and economic impacts are based on scientifically supported studies’.

Mr Nariva stressed that scientifically supported studies have been proven worldwide to have failed in certain areas. “So why is it that we have to depend on scientifically proven studies,” he said. Another loophole he pointed out in the terms of reference was: ‘A description of the possible environmental and resource management impact of the project’. Mr Nariva said environmental impact cannot and should not be based on possibilities; it has to be precise.

Another section in the terms of reference says there should be a description of all historical and project-related public consultation activities.

To this, Mr Nariva questioned: “For consultations, have they consulted people in the Province of Naitasiri, Rewa and Tailevu? “These are the people who rely on the Waidina River which comes through Namosi and joins the Rewa River. These people use the river for their living and would surely be affected,” he said.

The committee gave as an example of their early concerns how during exploration work the Namosi Joint Venture had dug a sump to dispose toxic waste in and carried on until the landowners pointed it out it was overflowing. They said the Namosi Joint Venture then dug another sump to dispose from the initial one. This led to more spill, the landowners claimed. They said the Namosi Joint Venture then had to bring in waste recyclers to clean up the mess.

To support their views on this the Tikina Namosi Landowners Committee provided a series of photos of what they said is the negative impact of exploration work on their land.

Meanwhile, the Namosi Joint Venture has so far been reluctant to enter into a public debate with the landowners. Instead it has consistently maintained that it is consulting directly with the landowners and Government through a jointly agreed process. It stressed there was an environmental impact assessment process underway.The assessment process includes extensive consultation with nearby villages and other impacted or interested stakeholders, it said. Proper studies will decide whether a mine can be developed safely and economically and in an environmentally sustainable manner, the Namosi Joint Venture said.

2 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Isa, this article is so full of inaccuracies, it is almost laughable.

During exploration drilling it is common and worlds best practise to dig a sump to contain water required for the drilling operation -- this water is recycled and essentially used to cool the drill as it makes contact with the rock to drill out a core sample. This "effluent" is not toxic, it is essentially wash water, but to preserve releasing untreated water into the enviroment, good practise dictates it be stored and reused in a closed reticulation system as much as possible. When the drilling operation has ceased, and to be really enviormental responsible, the recommended best practise it to pump this water into a tank and remove it for treatment and proper disposal to ensure no fluids are released into the surrounds. Regretably the actions of Newcrest to do the right thing, seem to have back fired as the Namosi people look to have formed the incorrect view this effluent must be "toxic" if one is bothered to contain it in a sump and then remove it. May be they think the tank to remove it is the same as the "topasi" and accordingly this fluid must be toxic the same as veka!!!It would be advisable for the Namosi people to investigate a bit further and educate themselves before making baseless accusations as they lose credibility and make a fool of themselves.

I know the bastard who wrote this Post. He works for the NJV. Whether the sum is toxic or not. THE FACT REMAINS THAT NJV Polluted our Environment when it breached SPL 1420. Thats why we ordering this work to stop immediately. We are the owners of the Land we decide what to be done in our land "Our Land is our Heart...If thats too hard to digest just Pack up and FUCK OFF from our land.....FULLSTOP

Links

About Me

Babasiga (pronounced bambasinga) is the dry land of Macuata in northern Fiji - our place in the sun in Fiji. Peceli is from Fiji from the village is Vatuadova and the beach is Nukutatava. Peceli Ratawa passed away on 27th December 2015 so this is Wendy's blog now. Wendy is an Australian and today live in Geelong, Australia.